Update on Iowa CCW bill-- HF 2092

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pramunitus

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2005
Messages
56
Location
Iowa
Since the previous thread was mysteriously closed, apparently because a moderator doesn't like threads that "don't ask a legal question", I thought I'd resurrect it here. HF 2092 seeks to correct blatant disregard of legislative intent included in Iowa's current law. Current Iowa law allows for "discretion" on the part of the sheriff, which many Iowa sheriffs (mostly eastern, but also some from other areas) interpret as "I can issue to whomever I want, and deny whomever I want."

Some other oddities of Iowa's current state of affairs:

1. As stated in the other thread, the Linn County Sheriff (and many others) won't issue for "self-protection". Yet, the application clearly states, "...statement is to contain clear and convincing evidence that this applicant may be required to use deadly force to protect his/her life or the life of another." The Linn County Sheriff will, however, issue to certain individuals, if they habitually carry over $500 CASH (they need to have $500 on their person if stopped), despite the fact that Iowa law precludes using deadly force to protect property.

2. The Dubuque County Sheriff uses the "domestic abuse" angle as a straw man argument. He maintains that he knows abusers who haven't been convicted, but whom will apply if the law is changed. Curious, since you don't need a permit to have a gun in your home, where 99% of domestic abuse occurs. Also curious, since someone who is already breaking the law is supposedly going to follow "this one law" (apply for a CCW Permit)???????

3. Iowa's law creates a patchwork of 100 different issuing standards (one for each of the 99 counties, and another for the Department of Public Safety (DPS)-- which issues Professional and Non-resident Permits). Curiously, the DPS has taken a much more professional approach to the current problem, and we're hearing that the Iowa Non-resident Permit is no longer virtually impossible to acquire. It's absolutely easier to acquire an Iowa Permit if you don't live here, in many cases.

Now, to satisfy the moderator, please debate and discuss pertinent legal issues. Also, please check out IowaCarry.org.
 
HF 2092 on to the full House for vote

HF 2092, a "Shall Issue" bill, will be coming up for a vote in the Iowa House sometime this next week. It passed the House Public Safety Committee on an 18-3 vote. This bill is "Shall Issue", but a sheriff can still deny for cause, much like the Minnesota law. Any denial or restriction must be explained in a certified letter to the applicant within 15 days of the filing of the application. Training is made uniform across the state, with acceptable trainers including certified NRA instructors. A shooting test is made mandatory for the initial issue. Reciprocity (recognition, actually) will be extended to all states' permits with equal or greater training standards, as posted on the website of the Iowa Department of Public Safety website. Finally, sheriffs will be given civil immunity for issuing in good faith.

Now is the time for action. If you live in Iowa, or travel to Iowa, please contact members of the Iowa House of Representatives and ask for their support of HF 2092.

For more information, check out www.iowacarry.org
__________________
 
Iowa arguements for shall issue, equal protection issues.

The ccw permit issue system is more than just gun rights, it is equal rights.

Many people who are not gun owner's still will give merit to the blantant arguements of that a shall issue bill will lead to everyone carrying and that there will be blood in the streets.

When contacting legislatures, you may want to consider the following.

1. How can we have a permit system which can and has been used to give privileges to one group of people while denying access to the general population if we have equality under the law.

2. It has been shown that the discretionary ccw system has been used by sheriffs across the country for personal gain. How can we tolerate a system that has and will always corrupt law enforcement professionals across the country.

3. Public gun policy should seek a reasonable balance between the personal right of self defense and legitimate public safety concerns.

Based on real world statistics on crime, the current discretionary ccw system infringes on personal safety and undermines public safety.

4. 40 states now treat all ccw applicants equally under the law, why do we still maintain a ccw system is a relic of the Jim Crow era?

Good luck in Iowa. We have work here in California. Our best hope is going for ccw on an equal protection angle.

Hopefully Heller will go our way and we will be able to have alot of fun out here.

Nicki
 
As stated in the other thread, the Linn County Sheriff (and many others) won't issue for "self-protection

What qualifies to carry a firearm then?

" Yea, um, I just like to walk around with a gun on my hip, you know, for the fun of it"...

"Can I pretty please have that permit now"? :scrutiny:
 
Iowa Border

I live on the Mississippi River about 40 miles from Iowa, and just across from WI. I would be thrilled if Iowa and Wisconsin could join the majority of the states and pass a shall issue statute.

Good Luck.
 
Well, yeah, sure, but if Iowa goes shall issue, there'll be a blood bath in the streets. Every fender bender will lead to a shoot-out. Everybody knows that. It's already happened in 40 other states, hasn't it?

Uh... hasn't it?
 
Anybody back home in the Hawkeye State have any news on this bill yet?

Not sure, but I just talked to a buddy of mine that retired a few months ago and moved to Iowa. 22 years in the Corps, was a small arms instructor for MSOS, numerous deployments, and a TSSCI. He was told no.
 
I'm thinking about moving back from NC next year and this could impact my decision. Is it wrong to have a "shall-issue litmus test" when moving? I guess this is the wrong site to pose this question!
 
iowajones said:
I'm thinking about moving back from NC next year and this could impact my decision. Is it wrong to have a "shall-issue litmus test" when moving? I guess this is the wrong site to pose this question!
Would you move somewhere that had "may issue" internet access?

How about somewhere asked for "probable cause" to buy a newspaper or visit a library?

If you wouldn't move somewhere that restricts your 1st Amendment rights, then don't move somewhere that restricts your 2nd.


Suggestion: Renew your NCDL for another 5+ years, get a non-res Iowa permit before you move back, and have your car registered to someone else.

If you get stopped, show them your Non-Res and your North Carolina ID. That should buy you enough time for the shall issue laws to pass.
 
We're on the same page here, WP.
When I moved down here it was in the back of my mind that I might move back to IA some day. But now that I'm really aware of 2nd amendment issues, I'm closely following this bill because it would instantly turn me off on moving back there with my wife. Maybe we can convince our families to leave and meet us somewhere inbetween. :evil: Just not Illinois
 
I heard somehow somewhere that the bill went into some kind of limbo since the congressional session closed and no vote was taken. So it's not "dead" and it's not law. It's... it's... some kind of zombie! :what:

Of course I could be completely wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top